Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Two sodium spray fire experiments performed by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) were used for a code - to - code comparison between CONTAIN - LMR and SPHINCS. Both computer codes are used for modeling sodium accidents in sodium fast reactors. The comparison between the two codes provides insights into the ability of both codes to model sodium spray fires. The SNL T3 and T4 experiments are 20 kg sodium spray fires with sodium spray temperature s of 200 deg C and 500 deg C, respe ctively. Given the relatively low sodium temperature in the SNL T3 experiment, the sodium spray experienced a period of non - combustion. The vessel in the SNL T4 experiment experienced a rapid pressurization that caused of the instrumentation ports to fail during the sodium spray. Despite these unforeseen difficulties, both codes were shown in good agreement with the experiment s . The subsequent pool fire that develops from the unburned sodium spray is a significant characteristic of the T3 experiment. SPHIN CS showed better long - term agreement with the SNL T3 experiment than CONTAIN - LMR. The unexpected port failure during the SNL T4 experiment presented modelling challenges. The time at which the port failure occurred is unknown, but is believed to have occur red at about 11 seconds into the sodium spray fire. The sensitivity analysis for the SNL T4 experiment shows that with a port failure, the sodium spray fire can still maintain elevated pressures during the spray.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

This report describes the methods, results, and conclusions of the analysis of 11 scenarios defined to exercise various options available in the xLPR (Extremely Low Probability of Rupture) Version 2 .0 code. The scope of the scenario analysis is three - fold: (i) exercise the various options and components comprising xLPR v2.0 and defining each scenario; (ii) develop and exercise methods for analyzing and interpreting xLPR v2.0 outputs ; and (iii) exercise the various sampling options available in xLPR v2.0. The simulation workflow template developed during the course of this effort helps to form a basis for the application of the xLPR code to problems with similar inputs and probabilistic requirements and address in a systematic manner the three points covered by the scope.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Hydrogen Risk Assessment Models (HyRAM) is a prototype software toolkit that integrates data and methods relevant to assessing the safety of hydrogen fueling and storage infrastructure. The HyRAM toolkit integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying accident scenarios, predicting physical effects, and characterizing the impact of hydrogen hazards, including thermal effects from jet fires and thermal pressure effects from deflagration. HyRAM version 1.0 incorporates generic probabilities for equipment failures for nine types of components, and probabilistic models for the impact of heat flux on humans and structures, with computationally and experimentally validated models of various aspects of gaseous hydrogen release and flame physics. This document provides an example of how to use HyRAM to conduct analysis of a fueling facility. This document will guide users through the software and how to enter and edit certain inputs that are specific to the user-defined facility. Description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM is provided in [1]. This User’s Guide is intended to capture the main features of HyRAM version 1.0 (any HyRAM version numbered as 1.0.X.XXX). This user guide was created with HyRAM 1.0.1.798. Due to ongoing software development activities, newer versions of HyRAM may have differences from this guide.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has embarked on the Deep Borehole Field Test (DBFT), which will investigate whether conditions suitable for disposal of radioactive waste can be found at a depth of up to 5 km in the earth’s crust. As planned, the DBFT will demonstrate drilling and construction of two boreholes, one for initial scientific characterization, and the other at a larger diameter such as could be appropriate for waste disposal (the DBFT will not involve radioactive waste). A wide range of geoscience activities is planned for the Characterization Borehole, and an engineering demonstration of test package emplacement and retrieval is planned for the larger Field Test Borehole. Characterization activities will focus on measurements and samples that are important for evaluating the long-term isolation capability of the Deep Borehole Disposal (DBD) concept. Engineering demonstration activities will focus on providing data to evaluate the concept’s operational safety and practicality. Procurement of a scientifically acceptable DBFT site and a site management contractor is now underway. The concept of deep borehole disposal (DBD) for radioactive wastes is not new. It was considered by the National Academy of Science (NAS 1957) for liquid waste, studied in the 1980’s in the U.S. (Woodward–Clyde 1983), and has been evaluated by European waste disposal R&D programs in the past few decades (for example, Grundfelt and Crawford 2014; Grundfelt 2010). Deep injection of wastewater including hazardous wastes is ongoing in the U.S. and regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2001). The DBFT is being conducted with a view to use the DBD concept for future disposal of smaller-quantity, DOE-managed wastes from nuclear weapons production (i.e., Cs/Sr capsules and granular solid wastes). However, the concept may also have broader applicability for nations that have a need to dispose of limited amounts of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors. For such nations the cost for disposing of volumetrically limited waste streams could be lower than mined geologic repositories.

Abstract not provided.